Technical Strategy

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by Tums, Oct 3, 2008.

  1. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    The IRV on bar 44 is a lateral formation BO, hence non-dominant.

    Geometrically, that could be called a traverse, but the gaussians wouldn't support it.
     
    #1771     Jan 27, 2009
  2. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    Gonna call it a day, leave it to the post-market debrief to shed more light on the proceedings.
     
    #1772     Jan 27, 2009
  3. sscott

    sscott

    Thanks Neoxx
     
    #1773     Jan 27, 2009
  4. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    The Day

    Geommetry vs Gaussians.

    Although the latter has to supercede the former, this generated a certain amount of conflict today.

    Structurally, 12:45 looks like it initiates both a short traverse and a short channel. However, the gaussians preclude the former, and in doing so, the latter too.

    At 12:30, I've annotated the start of my lateral. Six bars are utterly encased within the shadow of the symmetrical pennant, so to my (perhaps limited) understanding, there cannot be any doubt as to the validity of the lateral, which invalidates the potential 13:10 R2R, and thus the inception of the short traverse. If it were merely a cumulative thing, adding the tapes and faster fractal traverses then all the elements are present. The lateral is the spanner in the works, and unless there is a valid way to remove it, I cannot annotate that segment any other way.

    The open also continues to puzzle. While the role of the opening tape is now clear, the gaussian signposts that should have presaged the subsequent short traverse still confound me.

    More questions than answers with this debriefing.


    <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2278755>
     
    • es.gif
      File size:
      99.3 KB
      Views:
      451
    #1774     Jan 27, 2009
  5. Neoxx,
    Do you have links for all this Geometry stuff your talking about. It seems to me your over complicating things. If I remember from one of Jack's "lost" posts, he said something like " analyze (A) the non-dom traverses slope to anticipate the strength/weakness of the pt 3 traverse.
     
    #1775     Jan 27, 2009
  6. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    You can substitute 'price action' for geometry. Guess I just have a knack for making things sound complicated. :p

    Thanks for the paraphrase. I'll try and locate the source.
     
    #1776     Jan 27, 2009
  7. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    I've been giving some more thought to yesterday, particularly the confusion around late mid-day.

    Assuming that the lateral was somehow removed, and the 13:10 bar had in fact denoted a gaussian shift, that would have been annulled by the bar immediately following, which confirmed a new long traverse point 3 rather than the non-dominant move of a short traverse.

    13:25 would have suggested reversing back short, 13:30 would have confirmed it.

    The next few bars should have denoted hold. An R2R then follows, then an R2B peak, but no B2R trough and sequence completion. Hence failure of a new dominant after the break of the channel RTL break and thus a new channel point 3 commenced with the FTT of the short faster fractal traverse.

    Another thought. I remember Jack's comment that the charts of November were 'immaculate', and ideal for beginners. As I review yesterday I see stretches of low volume, frequent internals, lengthy laterals and a lot of overlapping bars. So maybe this is the normal state of affairs. Maybe things aren't always neat and perfect and organized. Perhaps that was just a fleeting luxury.

    And the new day opens...
     
    #1777     Jan 28, 2009
  8. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    Similar open to yesterday.

    Also note two significant news items:

    10:30 - Crude oil inventories
    14:15 - FOMC statement
     
    #1778     Jan 28, 2009
  9. Neoxx

    Neoxx

    Enter long.

    859.5 @ 10:02:16

    And prv is slowly falling...

    <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2279353>
     
    • 1.gif
      File size:
      40.5 KB
      Views:
      383
    #1779     Jan 28, 2009
  10. IMO, one needs be careful about what's news and what isn't. It will be very rare that OI's produce any significant price movement (and yes , what is significant?). The FOMC statement on the other hand can always be counted on to stir things up. Years back during my first, and very disastrous foray into the market, I spent a lot of time and money looking at the 'anticipated' vs 'real' effects of 'eco #'s" on price movement and found them to be, by and large, pretty much a wash, with a few notable exceptions. FOMC staements were one of these.
    As is true for the over-riding aorta in the Tetrology of Fallot, so it is with the effects (generally-speaking) of eco #'s - things are more apparent than real.

    lj
     
    #1780     Jan 28, 2009